match_ingredients_to_products

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that commission rates are benchmark estimates (not live data), which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention if any data is persisted or require authentication, missing some context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Description is concise (6 sentences), front-loaded with the core purpose, covers key aspects without redundancy, and includes a illustrative example.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Moderately complex tool with no output schema; the description adequately explains the return values (affiliate details, price range, commission rate, substitutions) and provides an example, making it complete for an agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and description adds value by clarifying the mutual exclusivity of ingredients and recipe_id, and providing an example output snippet, going beyond the schema's descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the tool matches recipe ingredients to purchasable products with affiliate details, and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'suggest_affiliate_products' by specifying its focus on ingredient-level details.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says when to use (for ingredient-level product details) and when not (use suggest_affiliate_products for revenue-ranked shopping list), and notes that input can be an ingredient list or a recipe_id from a prior extraction.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.